libera/#neo900/ Wednesday, 2019-03-13

Joerg-Neo900xmn: absolutely, yes03:27
Joerg-Neo900sixwheeledbeast: interesting03:40
DocScrutinizer05my root password had 6 hits05:10
atkno hits on anything important07:56
atkan old old old password I used07:56
atkwhich is generic enough to have been used by lots of other people07:57
atk5140 matches :D07:57
DocScrutinizer05don't use the web interface at !
DocScrutinizer05or if you do, c&p the password so only one query with full length passowrd gets generated08:40
xmn do you guys feel safe using this with your passwords?08:45
DocScrutinizer05yes, the local shellscript is safe08:49
DocScrutinizer05the web interface is NOT !!!08:49
xmnyeah, so the local one hashs your password and then check it against their database right?09:01
Joerg-Neo900xmn: right09:11
Joerg-Neo900actually it also truncates the hash to leading 5 chars09:11
Joerg-Neo900thanks to max-p of PIA for helping with the analysis of the web interface09:17
atkI didn't use the shellscript or the web-interface09:21
atkI just manually generated the hash and manually made the web requests09:21
atkI know there isn't much in that shell script, but who the fuck knows, I don't know bash that well, might be here's some missing character somewhere which would cause things to be interpreted "incorrectly"09:22
sixwheeledbeastYes it hashes the password and only sends the first 5 chars of the sha1 to the api. You receive the sha's that match and compare locally is how I read it. I assume I am reading the source of the script correctly and there is nothing else in there.09:27
Joerg-Neo900atk: the true geek's approach :-)09:28
sixwheeledbeastThe website (HIBP) can work the same if you sha1 your password first I believe but the website source would need checking each time. My only concern is bash will log the password in plaintext locally.09:29
sixwheeledbeastTime to change your root password I think Doc09:30
Joerg-Neo900how and where/why would bash log any of that?09:30
Joerg-Neo900of course my rot pw got changed hours ago09:30
Joerg-Neo900been about time anyway09:30
sixwheeledbeastIf you run the script on the shell the plaintext will be in history09:31
Joerg-Neo900that's why my recommendation is to run the script without parameters and provide the pw on prompt09:31
sixwheeledbeastand therefore ~/.bash_history09:31
sixwheeledbeastI see, I haven't played with it much yet just used some known passwords in to check09:32
sixwheeledbeastcorrecthorsebatterystaple for example09:33
Joerg-Neo900how many hits? :-D09:33
sixwheeledbeastI see so the prompt wouldn't be logged anywhere, the script will end therefore never stored to disk.09:36
Joerg-Neo900exactly. The usual way to deal with this, also used by passwd(1)09:37
sixwheeledbeastyes logins etc. compare the first part of the hash09:38
xmncool, good info guys thanks09:41
sixwheeledbeastIt's a handy little script to have in your toolbox09:42
Joerg-Neo900sixwheeledbeast: >> (HIBP) can work the same if you sha1 your password...<< does exactly same like script, incl generating SHA from plaintext password locally, according to Max-P's analysis09:44
sixwheeledbeastI see it just hooks into the HIBP API. What are your concerns over the website versions? I personally wouldn't use a website for this as I would want to check over the source of the site each time I need it, it may have been compromised.09:48
Joerg-Neo900sixwheeledbeast: it does incremental search, thus the first query sent out is for exactly one out of max 256 chars, it's dead simple to reverse the hash to conclude the single char09:54
Joerg-Neo900the next query is for the hash of a 2char password, of which first char is known from last query09:54
Joerg-Neo900so again one out of 256 choices09:54
Joerg-Neo900this way you "recursively" or iteratively reveal the complete password from snooping HTML traffic as it is typed, in realtime09:56
sixwheeledbeastoh I believed it would send the first part of the sha and match locally. Also site is https like the API to reduce risk of leaking the sha109:58
Joerg-Neo900yes, HTTPS defeats a worst case scenario here09:58
Joerg-Neo900it actually does >>send the first part of the sha and match locally<<09:59
Joerg-Neo900but that first 5 chars of SHA are more than sufficient to discern between 256 possible solutions to find the right one09:59
sixwheeledbeastSo similar risk with the API then?10:00
Joerg-Neo900no since the local version only does ONE query for full length password, no incremental search10:01
Joerg-Neo900the website does one query for each char you type10:01
sixwheeledbeastoh I see, you can unhash each of the 5 sent chars for sure even without the rest of the hash10:02
sixwheeledbeastnot unhash10:02
Joerg-Neo900nah, those 5chars are truncated SHA sum, not truncated password10:02
xmnsixwheeledbeast: makes a good point on that the site could be comprised at some other time. Where as the script will stay the same and hash locally.10:02
Joerg-Neo90012345678X will still send a different truncated 5char hash than 12345678O10:04
sixwheeledbeastI understand I am just not explaining verbosely. You have reduced the amount of hashs it isn't because it has been sent 1+2+3+4+5 times10:05
Joerg-Neo900!md5 s10:06
Joerg-Neo900~md5 s10:06
Joerg-Neo900~md5 sk10:06
Joerg-Neo900~md5 skr10:06
Joerg-Neo900~md5 skri10:06
Joerg-Neo900~md5 skrit10:07
Joerg-Neo90003c7 41d6 1542 6243 eaef  <- completely describes "skrit"10:08
* Joerg-Neo900 is fond of this terse explanation by example of above 11 lines :-)10:12
atksixwheeledbeast: That's what I read from the shell script13:58
atksixwheeledbeast: but, I ... well13:59
atkI just don't trust such things even when it's so obvious13:59
atkI've seen IOCCC13:59
atkI'm now going to be working in infosec as of next month13:59
atkYou can say I'm paranoid13:59
Joerg-Neo900so enjoy my augmented ticket ;-)
galiven_For bash at least, putting a space before the actual command won't log to ~./bash_history20:22

Generated by 2.17.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!